RANGELANDS12(2), April 1990 121 operation was substantially higher because of the addi- allocating15% of the fixed vehiclecosts to the enterprise, tional driving associated with guiding hunters and may the break-even charge is $77.90 per hunter day. In com- also involve picking up hunters in town. Providing guid- paring the break-even chargeswith the estimated fee of ing services requiresadditional labor and includesa cost $111.93, it appears this option is also profitable. for the operator to becomelicensed as an outfitter and Discussion and Conclusions This is a in if the guide. requirement Wyoming hunting Additional income was the reason cited enterpriseused landsnot owned by the operator, includ- primary by lands, or if are hired the operators for beginning a recreation enterprise. While ing public guides by operator. ranch recreationhas the to earna realiz- The budget for Example 2 is shown in Table 2. In this potential profit, the breakeven is hunter ing that potential dependson each operator'ssituation. example charge $24.81 per day. evaluate his the break-even with the estimated fee Eachoperator must particularsituation and Comparing charge consider suchas with the of $36.32 that this of any subjectivefactors, dealing per day (Table 1) suggests type when a ranch recreation is also public, assessing the potential of operation profitable. When landowners and are able to Example 3 describes an agricultural operation that pro- enterprise. recognize realize a situation and other vides 14,400 acres for deer and The profitable through hunting antelope hunting. recreation activitieson their land, wildlife habitat will be hunting enterprise operates for 28 days with thirty-five viewed as an asset and not a customershunting an average of four days per hunteror liability. 140 hunterdays. With theinclusion of lodging and meals, Literature Cited Example 3 is the most capital and labor intensive opera- D.E. 1986. Cost of Worland tion considered in the analysis. Costs of the recreation Agee, producing crops, Area, Wyoming, 1985-86. Division of Agricultural Economics and Cooperative enterprise increase substantiallybecause ofthe increase ExtensionService, University of Wyoming. Bulletin 644R. July. in labor inputs, investment in cabins, and food expenses. Guynn, D.E. 1979Management of deer hunters on private land in One hundred of the fixed costsof the cabins were Colorado. Ph.D. Diss., Colorado State University. percent StevenB. Jack C. M. Brown- allocated recreation because most Lacey, J.R., Laursen, Gllchrlst, Roger to the operation oper- son, Jan Anzlk, and Stuart Doggert. 1987. Economic and social ators indicated that these units were used only for the implications of managing wildlife on private land in Montana. hunting enterprise. Vehicle requirements were similar to MontanaState University, CooperativeExtension Service. 2. Thomas,J.W. 1987. Fee hunting on the public's lands?—Anapprai- Example sal. Trans.North American Wildlife NaturalResource Conference. The budget for Example 3 is shown in Table 2. When 49:445-467. Exotic Big Game: A Controversial Resource Stephen Demarals, David A. Osborn, and James J. Jackley Establishment of exotic big game in the United States vertently becomeunwanted, even harmful inhabitantsof has becomea topic of great controversydue to possible our rangelands. dietarycompetition and diseaseinteractions with native Problems can occur when stocking exotic big game wildlife and domesticlivestock. The potential for greater with incompleteknowledge of the biology of the species, financial returns from exotic big game production than its habitat requirements, disease relationships, or its from traditional livestockranching stimulatesthe intro- impacton native biota (Ables 1977). Additional research duction of exotics in spite of these dangers. To insure on the ecological implications of free-rangingexotics is success, managers should consider all biological and needed to establish proper management guidelines for economic aspects of exotic big game before venturing these species. into this industry. Pros and Cons Exotic big game refers to all non-nativehoofed mam- The positive aspects of exotic big game are summar- mals which have game status in at least part of their ized in five general categories: (1) year-roundincome to current U.S. distribution. Managed appropriately,exotic the landowner, (2) increased opportunities for hunters, big game can improvethe economic stability of ranching (3) preservation ofendangered species, (4) fillingof open and increase the diversity of game species available to niches,and (5) aesthetic value. hunters. If not responsiblymanaged, exotics may mad- Incorporationof exotic big game hunting and/orexotic venison intoa can Authors are assistant professor and graduate researchassistants. Range production ranchingenterprise gener- and Wildlife ManagementDepartment, Texas Tech University,Lubock, Texas ate year-round income. Many states allow exotic big 79409. This isCollege of Agricultural Sciencespublication T-9-565 and Welder Wild- game to be harvested at the landowner's discretion.The life Foundationcontribution 358. 122 RANGELANDS12(2), April 1990 grasses (Robinson and Bolen 1989). Another positiveaspect of exotic big game is their aes- thetic value.Each year approximately10,000 payingtour- ists visit the V.0. Ranch,a commercialwildlife enterprise specializingin exotic and nativebig game in Kerr County, Texas toview and photographthese animals (L. Schreiner, pers. comm.). Negative aspectsof exotic big game can be summar- ized into the following four general categories:(1) com- petition for niches, (2) uncontrolled spread, (3) disease complications,and (4) interbreedingwith nativewildlife. Theoretically,only one species can occupy a niche. If two species share thesame nicheone or both species will FIg. 1. Exotic species depleted in their native lands, suchas this blackbuck antelope,can beraised in the United States for eventual repopulation. harvest of animalscan bescheduled accordingto optimal growth and development, economicfactors, and market demand. Exotic vension production can be a lucrative form of agriculture (von Kerckerinck1987). Introductionsof aoudad sheep, Persian ibex,and Siber- ian ibex in New Mexico are examples where introduced big game have increased hunting opportunities for the public (Upham 1980). The islands of Hawaii have no nativedeer; however, axis deerand black-taileddeer were introduced on Hawaii in 1868 and 1961, respectively (Tomich 1969). Thirty-eight thousand hunters received FIg. 2. Theexpanding venisonmarket provides a commercial useof permits to hunt axis deer in Hawaii during the 1988 sea- exotic game presently occupying rangelands in Texas. son, and morethan 50 percent of the hunters were suc- suffer. For example, the decline of white-tailed deer on cessful (T. Kaiakapu, pers. Comm.). Assateague Island, Maryland, is attributed to sika deer The preservation of endangered species often can be (Keiper1985). accomplishedmore easily in the United States than in The effectsof unregulated competitionbetween native developingcountries. Through the efforts of the African white-tailed deer and two species of exotic deer within Fund for Endangered Wildlife and Game Conservation 96-acredeer-proofed enclosures were studied in Texas. International, the American Association of Zoological Equal numbersof axisdeer and white-taileddeer and sika Parks and Aquariums, and ranchersin the United States, deer and white-tailed deer were placed in two separate aSpecies Survival Plan has been established to enrichthe enclosures for nine years without human interference. genetics of captive endangered species (Winckler1985). After nine years, the axis/white-tailed deer enclosure Niche refers to a species' specialized requirements, contained 15 axis deer and only three white-taileddeer which include food, cover, and space. A niche can be and the sika/white-taileddeer enclosures contained 62 considered"open" if all the necessary requirements for a sika deer and no white-taileddeer. With no human inter- speciesare presentbut not being used. The ring-necked vention to regulate density and minimize competition, pheasant, introducedin theUnited States from Asia, suc- and limited resources within the 96-acre enclosures, axis cessfullyfilled a nichewhich opened asthe native prairies deer and sika deeroutcompeted native white-tailed deer were converted to cereal grains and other domestic (Baccus et at. 1985). RANGELANDS12(2), April 1990 123 Uncontrolledspread of exoticscan bea problem. Some seven species were represented. Axis deer, native to landowners do not want to include them in their man- India, Sri Lanka, and Nepal, is the most common exotic agement plan. Approximately45 percentof the exotic big species in the state with 39,000 animals.Nilgai antelope, game in Texas are not behindgame-proof fencing (Ira- also from India, rankssecond with over36,700 and black- week 1989). Population control is difficult without ade- buck antelope,almost extinct on the plains of India and quate fencing (Harmeland Litton 1981). Pakistan, ranks as the third most common exotic with Disease complicationscan result from the interactions over21,200 animals. Thesethree species along with aou- of nativegame, exotic game,and domestic livestock. The dadsheep (from North Africa), fallowdeer (originatingin the Mediterranean area), and sika deer (from southeast Asia)constitute 87 percentof thetotal numberof exotics in Texas. Texans have seen exoticsthat were first introduced in the 1930's for aestheticreasons